Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Basketball' started by os_mutante, Oct 29, 2014.
Wasn't aware of that.
Warriors second unit almost blew a 30-point lead at home to the Grizzlies and ended up only winning by 4.. Glad I didn't bet on last night's game.
So if the Warriors win or not lose by more than 1 point to the Nuggets on Wednesday they will finish with a double-digit point differential. I think it would be the first time a team has done it since Jordan's Bulls.
07-08 Celtics, I think.
Good catch. Maybe the factoid was that the Warriors, if they can catch the Clippers in Offensive Efficiency (currently .4 behind) would be the first team since that Bulls team to lead in both Offensive and Defensive Efficiency.
It's hard to keep track of all these Warriors factoids.
Has a team that had that statistic ever not won the title? That statistic is probably the single biggest reason I fear GSW - because on paper I think if the Spurs can slow down splash siblings, the rest of the team might not be able to make up for it. And are they playoff hardened enough? On the other hand, a potential game 7 at home is pretty key.
Crazy how good their regular season has been - I used to cheer for Run TMC when I lived in Berkeley and when Don Nelson traded Webber for Gugliotta I wanted to light my head on fire - so while I don't love any of their players (aside from the former Spur coach), I wouldn't hate it if that franchise won something, assuming my team isn't in it.
No scoring big
I was thinking Durant would be back. And a healthy OKC squad is probably the biggest threat to the Spurs. But given the circumstances, I don't think they really care.
Sorry what's your theory on this? I mean, NBA teams have won the title without a "scoring big" in the past.
How do you define scoring big? Detroit Pistons did it probably 3 times, Chicago Bulls did it, I'd argue that the Heat did it. And I guess you could say Nowitzki is a "scoring big" but that's not exactly how he played.
So going back to the Bulls in 98, with the greatest player ever. It's been 17 years.
Nowitzki is a scoring big, I don't see how he is not. He did in fact score, correct? Heat did it with Bosh.
Pistons in 2004? I mean, Rasheed scored 13 ppg and shot 400, that's not really my definition of a scoring big. And that season they were playing against arguably the best big man in the game in the finals.
Nowitzki is a 7 foot jump shooter - that's also not really my definition of a scoring big. Bosh got his points, but it's hard for me to not believe that if you swapped him out with a guy like Tyson Chandler, that team wouldn't have found a way to win a title.
David Lee has averaged 20 ppg in seasons past, he doesn't count as a scoring big?
Don't get me wrong, I think size matters a ton in the playoffs - as do mis-match nightmares - but I also think there are holes in that theory. There are almost always exception to any rule like that.
Rasheed may have not had the greatest stats, but he was a legitimate threat. Enough of a threat to stretch out the big to open up the lanes, or get teams to double, or at least consider it inside.
Jump shooter or not for Dirk, he scored. It has an effect on your defense. As for Bosh, don't forget that it was without him where they were on the verge of elimination against the Celtics and once he returned, they ended up coming back to win that series.
David Lee has done nothing this season. If he revives, then sure, but so far that's a no.
So if you stretch the floor, then scoring big? In that case, Draymond Green will do fine.
A stretch big does more than just shoot 3s
I guess I don't see where you're coming from here. Wallace gets "scoring big" credentials because he was a "threat" who "stretched the defence", and got teams to "consider the inside" but Green doesn't get the same credentials?
To me a stretch big is someone that can drag out the big interior defenders outside of the paint with their shooting and can punish teams in the post when smaller, quicker players are put on them. Don't see Green being a legitimate threat where defenses key in on him.
So first it was about getting defences to "consider", and now its "keying in"? Feels like a double standard?
Rasheed Wallace and all other scoring bigs were key players.
Draymond Green IS a key player. That's why he's rumored to be getting the max and why the Warriors are intent on keeping him. Why do you think their defence is so good? Because Green is a very versatile player on defence and a big reason why they can switch on screens and such so often.
He's rumored to get the max because of his defense, not his offense. His offense is solid, not something that will have the defense on alert all the time though.
You guys are sincerely ignoring Dorks work on the low block. He scores plenty clutch buckets in the post. Driving, fading away
Fücking Raptors decide to tank for the 4 seed. I want the Bulls to get the 4 seed. Fück Canada
You don't want the Wizards. ..Chicago is the only team that we match up well with.
John Wall would be a good warm up for Kyrie